Apple seeks $1 billion from Samsung at retrial for patent violations

Samsung will argue Apple is only entitled to profits for "selling something of that shape, and not for the profits for selling the functionality that goes inside the shape", Risch said.

The third covers the graphical UI demonstrating the design of applications on its home screen.

Samsung isn't refuting the claim that it infringed on Apple's patents but instead of the latter's demand for $1 billion in damages, it's asking for a much smaller penalty of $28 million. Come December 2015, it was decided that Samsung would finally pay Apple $548 million.

The trial first erupted in 2011, just a year after Apple released the original iPhone 4.

Quinn told jurors to maintain an "open mind" and resist Apple's casting South Korean company as being "mired" in old phone models until it copied Apple. He also argued that the phone industry as a whole was moving toward screen-focused phones in 2007, and that the iPhone was not the first or only phone with a prominent screen design.

Samsung attorney John Quinn held up components to the jury, emphasizing that each was its own article of manufacture and that there are "hundreds of articles of manufacture inside a phone".

Apple and Samsung are back in court over seven-year patent dispute

"What was Samsung's solution?" he asked the jury rhetorically.

In late 2016, the US Supreme Court agreed with Samsung and ordered the two tech giants to negotiate a date for a retrial to settle the award money for Apple, the The Korea Herald report said.

Samsung then appealed the lower court's ruling to the Supreme Court, attempting to limit the compensation to profits attributable to a specific component patent in question. The scope of Apple's design patents "are so very narrow" he said. The case is Apple Inc v Samsung Electronics Co, 11-cv-01846, US District Court, Northern District of California (San Jose). Apple wants $1bn from Samsung, the full amount of profit it made from phones that infringed three of Apple's design patents. The glass is easily separated from the phone and doesn't cost much, Samsung has argued.

Those design elements were protected, prompting the jury to award Apple all the profits from sales of smartphones containing those features, Samsung lawyers said in their filing. Koh has forbidden that argument on the ground that Samsung didn't raise it in the previous trial or on appeal.

Apple has described how the iPhone and overall product design became embedded in the company's DNA. The design patents that Samsung infringed concern the physical shape that would become the iPhone, the bezel, and the colorful grid of icons.